[HN Gopher] Brazilian vote counting (real time)
___________________________________________________________________
Brazilian vote counting (real time)
Author : frozenlettuce
Score : 81 points
Date : 2022-10-02 20:12 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (resultados.tse.jus.br)
(TXT) w3m dump (resultados.tse.jus.br)
| UncleOxidant wrote:
| Where are these initial votes coming from? They show Bolsonaro
| about 7% ahead of Lula. But only 1.5% of the vote is in, so I'm
| guessing it's from more right-leaning areas so far? (given that
| the polling has consistently showed Lula about 10% head of
| Bolsonaro in the last couple of months)
|
| Edit: follow-on question: are the other candidates there pulling
| more from Bolsonaro or Lula?
|
| Edit2: Looks like both Ciro Gomes and Simone Tebet would draw
| votes form Lula based on the info on them from Wikipedia. They're
| drawing about 7% of the vote between the two of them so in a
| runoff between Bolosonaro and Lula so it seems like most of those
| votes would go to Lula. Still would be very close.
| [deleted]
| cardosof wrote:
| Richer areas always get counted first.
| soneca wrote:
| Yes, they are coming from regions of Brazil where Bolsonaro was
| expected to go better according to the polls.
| cassianoleal wrote:
| I reckon a better picture should start to get painted at around
| 70-75%.
| frozenlettuce wrote:
| I would say that candidates pull votes from both. People are
| very ashamed of voting to one of the greater evils in the first
| round - in the second round votes should be evenly distributed.
| UncleOxidant wrote:
| From reading the wikipedia entries on Ciro Gomes and Simone
| Tebet it seems like they would definitely draw more votes
| from Lula and that in a runoff those votes would
| overwhelmingly go to Lula - but I'm not too familiar with
| Brazilian politics, am I missing something?
| frozenlettuce wrote:
| Simone is from a centrist party. She tried forming a "third
| option", but failed to gain traction. I do think that she
| has a solid position for 2026.
|
| Ciro is from a traditional leftist party, and worked in the
| Lula government. In the past few weeks he has been
| resorting to nationalistic and more right-wing talk (pro
| family values, against identity politics). So the Ciro from
| the beginning of the election would draw votes from Lula,
| but not the one in the end. Some trivia: Glenn Greenwald
| has a close relationship with Ciro.
| Qem wrote:
| Small, far away cities, say, in deep Amazon and in northeastern
| semi-arid, take more time to be counted. Lula electorate is
| more overwhelming in those areas, as they have more poor people
| that suffered a lot with current policies in Bolsonaro term,
| like relatives dying without suplementary oxygen in the
| pandemic, due to mismanagement.
| UncleOxidant wrote:
| I would guess there are a lot of poor people in the cities
| like Rio de Janiero as well.
| bluepizza wrote:
| Yes, but in urban areas, poor people are targeted by
| evangelical churches, which are all supporting conservative
| candidates. So it's really hard to predict if a
| disadvantaged area will vote left or right.
| gtirloni wrote:
| Overseas polls that closed earlier. Mostly middle class that
| moved abroad but still vote.
| haolez wrote:
| The last poll came out just yesterday[0]. It pointed out to Lula
| being way ahead of Bolsonaro (50% vs 36% for Lula), but so far it
| seems that Bolsonaro has a chance of finishing ahead of Lula (46%
| vs 44% for Bolsonaro so far).
|
| It's the same as in the 2018 elections. I'm neutral in this
| election, but on this specific topic of election polls, I agree
| with the conspiracy theorists that something is really off about
| them.
|
| [0] https://g1.globo.com/politica/eleicoes/2022/pesquisa-
| eleitor...
| system2 wrote:
| Voting stats are like real life computer games.
| rogerthis wrote:
| No one sees a vote. It's just bleebleeblee and it's magically
| computed.
|
| PS: Weirdly.
| pruthvishetty wrote:
| Any details on the infrastructure behind this? How are they
| handling security?
| gabriel34 wrote:
| Security audits and supervisors from all parties in all steps
| for starters.
|
| The voting machine prints a total for that machine at the same
| time that the votes are transferred to the central counting,
| this process is public, the supervisor from each party get a
| copy of the total, and one copy is publicly affixed at the
| voting place, so parallel aggregating from the partial counts
| is possible (and has been done by sampling).
|
| Internal counting on the voting machine is somewhat validated
| by picking random voting machines out of the voting places and
| conducting a parallel voting, publicly broadcasted, on which
| known amount of votes for each candidate are input and the
| result from the machine is compared to the expected. Only thing
| missing that I can think of is actually doing this parallel
| voting on the same time and place the voting was expected to
| take place.
| frozenlettuce wrote:
| That's a sensitive topic, as Bolsonaro has questioning the
| voting machine security.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting_in_Brazil
|
| Even Tom Scott's video about electronic voting shows in Brazil
| with a warning saying that "electronic voting is safe" (the
| same type of warning that shows up for conspiracy theories).
|
| We had no problems with those machines since 1996. My take is
| that he does that to mobilize his support base.
|
| One curious thing is that the centralized voting counting is
| done with an Oracle system. Some politicians questioned the
| contracts value, and why AWS or Google cloud weren't considered
| - authorities argued that only Oracle supported Oracle's cloud
| : )
| bigbluedots wrote:
| > We had no problems with those machines since 1996.
|
| None that have been discovered yet at least!
| thaumasiotes wrote:
| > We had no problems with those machines since 1996.
|
| This is the kind of thinking that gets you to "less than 1%
| of rape accusations are false". How do you know you don't
| have any problems?
| frozenlettuce wrote:
| Each party has delegates present during vote counting, in
| state and city level. That only became an issue recently.
| That said, I do believe that the system would be better if
| physical counting could be performed as well, to increase
| public trust and to avoid the same situation in 82 fraud
| against Brizola.
| tarakat wrote:
| > Each party has delegates present during vote counting
| [..] the system would be better if physical counting
| could be performed as well
|
| If there's no physical counting, then what are the
| delegates observing? If the machines were compromised,
| how could they tell?
| Matheus28 wrote:
| I believe they also have a button to spit out current
| vote count for each candidate, obviously still possible
| for the code to detect when that button is being used a
| lot to check if it's counting properly.
|
| It's tricky because votes are meant to be secret (and
| voters aren't allowed to have proof of who they voted
| for, so they can't be coerced into revealing it), while
| at the same time you want the system to be secure.
| frozenlettuce wrote:
| You have the total of votes per machine. In looking at
| these locations local candidates have a good notion on
| how well their party is going to perform. Things that
| call their attention are the "bumps" like the one by the
| end of last US election. When that happens, they can
| signal the voting machine to be isolated and call in an
| electoral judge.
| tarakat wrote:
| Sounds easy to evade. Once a machine has recorded 10+
| votes since the last time it outputted a count, it could
| start giving a small probabilistic advantage to a
| preferred candidate, at the expense of other candidates.
| There would be no bumps, and the results would never
| differ by more than, say, relative 20% from the real
| count. E.g. if preferred candidate got 10% on one voting
| machine, it would give him 12%, taking the other 2% from
| all other candidates.
|
| No bumps or disproportionate popularity in traditionally
| unpopular regions to raise suspicion.
| biscoito wrote:
| It's also nice to note that there have been already security
| audits on the current system, TPS (The public security test
| for TSE the Superior Electoral Court) happens every year
| addressing the security of e-voting in Brazil, for example,
| on TPS 2017, people managed to find arbitrary code execution
| in the Urna Eletronica (That's how we call the e-voting
| system here)
|
| Great content to read: https://urnaeletronica.info/ https://w
| ww.researchgate.net/publication/326261911_Execucao_... https:
| //www.researchgate.net/publication/323470546_The_Retur... htt
| ps://www.researchgate.net/publication/330914587_The_Good_...
| mrlonglong wrote:
| Did anyone notice the English translation of Lula's name is
| Squid? Honestly?!
|
| I do hope he wins, for the planet's sake.
| firekvz wrote:
| Before the whole debate of electronic vote being safe or not,
| please considere the following:
|
| Not all countries work the same, what you perceive as corruption
| in the US is nowhere near of the reality of corruption in
| southamerica, a place where corruption is not only a word or a
| definition but it's literally the force that move things,
| corruption is pretty much already part of the culture.
|
| So please, don't put your own experiences from the US/1st world
| countries in practice here, trying to explain how things work in
| 3rd world countries when you are not fully aware of the level of
| corruption in brazil. If brazilians themselves are talking about
| the huge window oportunity for corruption is because they know
| their culture, they know their problems and they know exactly how
| things work in their very own coutry.
| cesarb wrote:
| In case you're curious about the voting machines which were used
| in this election, here's a voting machine teardown (2018):
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wrMLzqgKEI
|
| (That's for an older model which is still in use, there's also a
| newer 2020 model.)
| thrownawaysz wrote:
| Is this site legal? I opened it once through Chrome where uBlock
| Origin runs, and now I just got a mail from a .br address into my
| inbox (not even the spam folder)
| https://files.catbox.moe/ijuogv.png
| [deleted]
| frozenlettuce wrote:
| All votes in country should be counted in the next few hours
| (last one took about 6hrs and people got angry with the delay).
| The results that are displayed right now are from voters from
| other countries where voting is already closed.
| frozenlettuce wrote:
| This is now outdated as local votes are already going in.
| euparkeria wrote:
| Iam so anxious, we have to take this monster away.
| UncleOxidant wrote:
| Given that he's actively encouraged more destruction of the
| Amazon rainforest it's in the best interests of everyone on
| earth that Bolsonaro go away.
| 988747 wrote:
| Don't know anything about Brazilian politics, but I'm already
| starting to like the guy, based on the comments above :)
| mercy_dude wrote:
| Who is the monster and why?
| tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
| Is it winner-takes-all plurality voting or will there be a second
| vote if no candidate reaches >50%?
| rapfaria wrote:
| second vote between two highest voted if none reaches 50% + 1
| amelius wrote:
| That doesn't sound fair to me.
|
| Like someone else mentioned, if Ciro Gomes and Simone Tebet
| draw votes from Lula, then there might not be a second vote
| and Bolsonaro has a better chance, whereas if there is a
| runoff between Bolsonaro and Lula, those votes would go to
| Lula.
| tremon wrote:
| Gomes and Tebet drawing votes from Lula doesn't affect the
| number of votes going to Bolsonaro, right? So whether or
| not they are on the ballot doesn't affect Bolsonaro's
| chances of reaching 50%+1 in the first round.
| cassianoleal wrote:
| Technically it's >50% even if for less than a whole vote.
| rapfaria wrote:
| How is it possible to have less than a whole vote?
| cassianoleal wrote:
| With an odd number of votes. e.g. if winner has 1000 and
| the sum of the others is 999, it goes by a half vote.
| ufo wrote:
| Second vote for governor & president. Winner-takes-all for
| senate seats. For the lower house of parliament the seats are
| proportionally distributed between the political parties.
| frozenlettuce wrote:
| This website has voting with a map as well
| https://www.poder360.com.br/eleicoes2022/apuracao/
| ece wrote:
| https://www.poder360.com.br/eleicoes2022/apuracao/
| frozenlettuce wrote:
| fixed! gotta love posting on mobile
| randiantech wrote:
| Independent of the results, I find it truly amazing how fast
| results are available for the public. Literally every refresh
| shows hundreds of thousands of new votes already verified and
| counted.
| RivieraKid wrote:
| Googled Lula's opinion about Russia's war against Ukraine.
| Surprisingly, he seems only slightly less pro-Russian than
| Bolsonaro.
| RivieraKid wrote:
| Is there a web site showing implied probability of who would
| become the next president based on betting odds?
| impeplague wrote:
| Side note: YouTube has a policy about not questioning the results
| of previous elections. In Brazil, this also includes questions
| about the security of electronic voting machines.
| sonthonax wrote:
| > YouTube has a policy about not questioning the results of
| previous elections.
|
| Such an absurd and institutionally biased policy, the USA has
| on many occasions in the last decade vigorously endorsed the
| outcomes of clearly rigged elections as a matter of policy.
| Iraq and Afghanistan come to mind.
|
| Will big tech remove valid accusations of ballot stuffing
| because it aligns with US policy?
| pclmulqdq wrote:
| Don't worry. If the US political party that YouTube employees
| favor loses the next election, this rule will be gone.
| frozenlettuce wrote:
| yes, they even flagged the Tom Scott video about eletronic
| voting with the following warning: "The Brazilian electronic
| voting system allows the exercise of citizenship with greater
| security. The ballot box was developed to compute votes
| safely and confidentially, meeting the demand and specific
| characteristics of Brazil."
|
| So eletronic voting is good or bad depending on what the
| candidates are.
| lhorie wrote:
| A few points of interest for those who aren't familiar w/
| brazilian politics:
|
| - as the link shows, brazilian political parties are numerous, so
| general elections typically have multiple candidates. There's no
| electoral college.
|
| - voting is mandatory in Brazil. In the 2018 presidential
| elections, there were ~117M voters. By comparison, the last US
| presidential election saw turnout of 158M voters.
|
| - Brazil has used electronic voting since 1996. General public
| sentiment towards it has historically always been positive. No
| instance of fraud has ever been surfaced and the system produces
| results extremely quickly (as in, within the same day).
|
| - Recently the president has been questioning its security, but
| for some context on his political platform, he also held a
| similar stance to Trump on the topic of Covid and has been
| criticized over his position saying deforestation is good for
| economy. He's still the favorite candidate. The second most
| popular candidate (Lula) has a long history of controversy (one
| of the most high profile being him being implicated in
| investigations related to the impeachment of the previous
| president Dilma). As you can imagine, many brazilians are cynical
| about the country's political system. Take that as you will.
| gberger wrote:
| You are mostly correct, but a bit misinformed in two topics.
| One, the favourite in all the credible polls is Lula. Second,
| the impeachment of Dilma was due to irregular monetary policy,
| while Lula was investigated for unrelated corruption charges.
| And please do not forget to mention that Lula's guilty verdict
| was invalidated on the basis that the judge was himself
| corrupt- so now Lula is presumed innocent.
| lvass wrote:
| >was invalidated on the basis that the judge was himself
| corrupt
|
| No, firstly the legal system changed and the veredicts given
| were considered insufficient for conviction. Then, they were
| annulled based on being outside the court's jurisdiction.
| UncleOxidant wrote:
| > voting is mandatory in Brazil
|
| What happens if you don't vote?
| haolez wrote:
| If you miss a few elections, you get put into a blacklist and
| can't get a passport, work for the government and a few other
| things.
|
| However, the fine for missing an election is ridiculous. It's
| something like 1 dollar. If you don't want to vote, you can
| stay at home and then pay this fine, but there is a caveat:
| 100% of this fine's value goes to Fundo Eleitoral, which is a
| fund managed by the parties and meant to be used for their
| publicity. In other words: you put money in an instrument
| that's probably corrupt.
| gaius_baltar wrote:
| Other people already explained the base case, but also: for
| voters who are out of the town were they originally enlisted,
| it just a matter of going to any poll station and filling a
| justify form. It is usually quicker than voting but, as the
| voter can not do it at the enlisted town, it is not an
| alternative.
|
| Voting is also highly distributed, on most towns no voter has
| to travel more than 1 or 2 km to get to their assigned
| polling station (if they enlisted to the station nearest to
| their homes, of course). Every voting zone is split in a
| number of "voting sections", every one with a single voting
| machine, and the number of section/machines per zone is
| mostly proportional to the number of voters, so queues are
| not that common; unless people group in some particularly
| unfortunate times ... local jokes say to NEVER vote at the
| opening hours, or you will be stuck on a line of senior
| citizens (who also have the right of jumping the queue,
| defined by law).
|
| Also, everything is defined with months of advance, so there
| are no surprises on where to vote.
|
| There is _a lot_ of safeguards to prevent fraud (we had a lot
| of time to learn this by the hard way) but the bad part is
| these also prevent some nice things (quickly moving your
| enlistment to another town /zone/section, mail voting, etc...
| even transit voting is very limited because you will need to
| know where you will be long before the poll).
| geonnave wrote:
| You just have to file a note explaining that you could not
| vote -- we call it "justifying the (non-) vote" / "justificar
| o voto". As of the current election, the it can be done on a
| mobile app.
| biscoito wrote:
| You get a R$ 3,51 fine, around US$ 0.65.
| frozenlettuce wrote:
| If you don't pay the fine you can't apply for public jobs, if
| already a government employee you can't receive a salary,
| can't issue a passport, and other restrictions. Nowadays you
| can justify the absence using a cellphone.
| nine_zeros wrote:
| The only people so worried about voting machines and voting
| fraud are frauds themselves who wouldn't win without
| disenfranchising a large swath of voters.
| atahanacar wrote:
| This makes no sense. Voting fraud is a real worry, especially
| when the competition is known to have no ethics and ignore
| any rule they can.
|
| Just because nobody is doing it now doesn't mean you should
| not be worrying about it.
| roamerz wrote:
| Agreed. Show up at the polls in person with government
| issued ID that has your picture and indicates if you are a
| Citizen and your address. That ID is then matched to an
| online database. No more of this mail in vote. Not one
| Citizen should have to worry about the accuracy of the
| vote.
| erinnh wrote:
| The CCC (Chaos Computer Club, which are one of the largest
| hacker collectives in Germany) area also sceptical about
| electronic voting machines and have been campaigning against
| them for roughly 20 years. Id definitely not call the CCC
| "frauds".
|
| Since 2009, electronic voting machines are illegal in
| Germany. The argument of our constitutional court is that
| every single voter needs to be able to understand how our
| voting system works without being an expert.
|
| https://wahlcomputer.ccc.de/
| zorked wrote:
| Brazil has a different threat model than Germany.
| erinnh wrote:
| I made no comment on the Brazil election, because I have
| no information about even how elections look like in
| Brazil.
|
| I was just commenting on the statement that only
| fraudsters would be against electronic voting machines.
| stefan_ wrote:
| It's still winner takes all, so sure, "political parties are
| numerous" yet all but two are hopeless.
| otikik wrote:
| The machines were not a problem when he won the first time.
| abdullahkhalids wrote:
| Off-Topic.
|
| I initially opened the website in Firefox. But did not grant it
| location permissions. So nothing showed up. Then I opened it in
| Chrome and gave it my location permissions. I started seeing
| stuff on Chrome, but also in Firefox.
|
| So the website has stored my ip+location information.
| mahmoudhossam wrote:
| I denied the location request and it worked anyway on Chrome.
| NavinF wrote:
| More likely the site is just unreliable and happened to work on
| the second try in Firefox. It is completely broken on iOS after
| denying location permissions.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-10-02 23:01 UTC)